Yes. Or rather, it has 58 holes and two missing holes. Which is the same as 57 teeth and one long tooth.

The point being that for this to work, you need a 60-2 -type of a trigger wheel. The ECU is expecting 58 peaks from the signal and a flat sport. It appears that you have 59 teeth in total, meaning that you have 58 teeth + 1 long tooth. That would be wrong.

__________________

Cops pulled me over. Papers, they said. Scissors, i replied. Still i did not win. Go figure.

This is a 60-2 trigger wheel. It has 58 actual teeth and 2 missing teeth.

And this is a 60-2 trigger wheel as well. It has 58 actual holes and 2 missing holes.

Both of those give essentialy the same signal. Only the signals are mirror images of one another. That is, if the sensor wires are not switched over.

It appears that you modified yours in a wrong way:

If you count the holes you have 59 actual holes and 1 missing hole. That is if you modified your trigger wheel as shown above. It's difficult to tell from your pictures how exactly you did modify it. The signal from that modified one will not be similar to the stock L2.4 flywheel.

Location: If there were a bright center of the universe, im in the town that is furthest from

Yes that was a volvo flywheel. You could try cutting the long tooth back off and reversing the polarity of the VR sensor, or make a plate that matches the profile of the Volvo Flywheel (this is the same issue that happens on 850 manual swaps, certain year flywheels require you to reverse the polarity of the VR sensor for Motronic to know whats going on...counting holes vs counting teeth.)

Yes that was a volvo flywheel. You could try cutting the long tooth back off and reversing the polarity of the VR sensor, or make a plate that matches the profile of the Volvo Flywheel (this is the same issue that happens on 850 manual swaps, certain year flywheels require you to reverse the polarity of the VR sensor for Motronic to know whats going on...counting holes vs counting teeth.)

So the problem is by adding two teeth with one gap eliminated I only filled in 9º, where each count should be 6º (tooth/gap), so by filling in the leading gap I will increase the radial count to 15º (three teeth/two gaps).

I focused on the description of one long tooth = twice the short tooth, neglecting to factor the gap as part of the equation (angular pitch between two short teeth = 6º)

If you count the holes you have 59 actual holes and 1 missing hole. That is if you modified your trigger wheel as shown above. It's difficult to tell from your pictures how exactly you did modify it. The signal from that modified one will not be similar to the stock L2.4 flywheel.

Many thanks for your visual reference, it made it much easier to comprehend where I had gone wrong

Many thanks for your visual reference, it made it much easier to comprehend where I had gone wrong

Glad it helped, and here's to hoping that fixing the trigger wheel will get this thing running!

There is a slight chance that the signal level is too low, but only trying it out will tell. Usually a smaller and a thinner wheel will give a lower signal with the same sensor than a bigger and thicker wheel. In this case you have the stock Volvo sensor, which is originally used with a big and thick wheel (flywheel).

If that is the case, bringing the sensor as close as possible to the wheel will strengthen the signal. Or a different sensor could be tried. Ford sensors usually give a higher voltage than the stock Volvo one. But it really depends on how the ECU is setup to handle the signal, so it could also be that it will work with the stock sensor.

Now it seems like it wants to start, but the timing "feels" - advanced - slightly dragging crank over -

I don't know if I need to set the TDC reference point (90degree) in the gap after 90, or on the tooth at 90 - I have it pretty much in the gap as it is. Since I have an adjustable distributor, I tried playing with that without any success . With all this cranking, the batt voltage may now be dropping too low for the system to function - goes down around 10v - so I've left it on a charger right now.

I do now have voltage at the fuel pump feed off the system relay when cranking, and code 141, which according to my guide means valid pulse signal. Don't know if that confirms anything in terms of timing though.

With a test light on the coil, I don't have a steady pulse on the negative side , which is also comfusing.

I will try shifting the sensor to the minimum gap, to see if that improves the signal strength in case that is the issue -thanks Wagner. Not sure what I can do about the trigger thickness, unless I buy another & braise the two together....

Moved the sensor inboard (axial move) slightly to center it under the trigger wheel -

Now it tries to catch but I think my fuel pressure is set too high now - I was running 4bar with the old system - timing still seems off - and it won't stay running long enough to check timing, and battery voltage is also too low after a couple of tries - drops below 10.5v

One other question is where the rotor should align @ TDC - centered or on the leading edge of the rotor tip?

Ok - after charging the battery awhile, and determining that if the engine stalls, the key has to be cycled (I was using a remote start) in order to reset the system relay. The engine now starts (very short crank time), but won't stay running for long & it still feels like the timing is off, turns slow like too much advance. It ran long enough for me to use a timing light & confirm the base timing is running at 12ºBTDC, so I'm not sure why it's 'lugging'. Since it does start, I'll go through the diagnostics & see what codes I come up with.

I don't know if the trigger wheel is accurately set in terms of relationship to TDC, although if it were not, I would think the system would not properly set the 12º base timing?

I also don't know what the proper distributor rotor setting is for LH2.4, relative to TDC. If anyone has a pic of the flywheel w/ sensor @ TDC, and of the correct rotor position, I would appreciate the input.

I also don't know what the proper distributor rotor setting is for LH2.4, relative to TDC. If anyone has a pic of the flywheel w/ sensor @ TDC, and of the correct rotor position, I would appreciate the input.

I don't have a picture handy, but the thing that matters on rotor positioning is that the rotor is pointing to the correct cylinder's spark plug lead at all ignition advance values.

I'm not sure of the maximum advance either on a B230F, but it's most likely in the region of 30-40 degrees of advance, and most likely not more than 40 in any case. So you could make a distributor cap with a hole in it so that you can look inside it. Turn the engine to compression stroke TDC of cyl. number 1 and verify that the rotor is pointing to cyl. 1 spark plug lead. Actually this would be 0 degrees of advance, which would not occur in use, so in this position it does not have to be exactly at cyl 1 position, but very near none the less.

Then turn the engine backwards 40 degrees and verify that the rotor is still pointing to cyl. 1 spark plug lead, and that it's close enough for the spark to jump.

EDIT: You could probably still bring the sensor closer to the wheel. And is the trigger wheel co-centric with the crank shaft, I.E. does the gap between the trigger wheel and the sensor remain constant while turning the crank?

EDIT - do you have an opinion on the placement in terms of gap / tooth @ 90 degree mark?

I'm hesitant about saying this, because this is based on memory, and could very well be all wrong: i seem to remember, that the end of the long tooth in a stock Volvo LH2.4 flywheel is at 84 degrees before top dead center.

So in other words, first find TDC. Then turn the engine backwards 84 degrees. Then your sensor tip should be at the ending edge of the section with no holes in it.

But that is really just based on memory. I have no way of verifying that right now. A picture of the stock system with engine at TDC would be helpful here.

EDIT: It appears that the Volvo manuals state, that the ECU determines TDC to be 90 degrees after the passage of the long tooth. So that would mean, that first finding TDC, then turning engine 90 degrees backwards, and then adjusting your trigger wheel so that the sensor tip is at the ending edge of the long tooth, should set your system up as stated on Volvo literature.

But that is really just based on memory. I have no way of verifying that right now. A picture of the stock system with engine at TDC would be helpful here.

EDIT: It appears that the Volvo manuals state, that the ECU determines TDC to be 90 degrees after the passage of the long tooth. So that would mean, that first finding TDC, then turning engine 90 degrees backwards, and then adjusting your trigger wheel so that the sensor tip is at the ending edge of the long tooth, should set your system up as stated on Volvo literature.

Thanks again for your input -

This is what I originally based my setting on (tip of CPS on trailing edge) - but since it didn't try to catch, I moved it CW to the center of the gap. However, that was with the incorrect tooth filler and a wider air gap overall, so I need to go back & try it again, setting the pickup to the edge of the tooth.

The tricky part is what exactly that means - centered over the edge, just past the edge, etc. All the design diagrams show the tip pretty much centered over the trailing edge, I think. I know they are just diagrams, but I do think they would try to be accurate in their depiction...

I have to remember to reverse everything compared to Volvo setup, since mine is on the front crank pulley vs. flywheel...

I don't want to chase my tail looking for potential causes of the startup issue until I know the CPS setting is accurate, since everything depends on it

Since mine is currently centered in the gap, I will first retry moving the trigger wheel CCW to get it centered over the trailing edge of the long tooth.

To answer your other question, the trigger wheel is not perfectly concentric (due to variations in slots for adjustment) - the air gap does vary, with the acceptable range, but still. I have tried to maneuver it to get the minimum gap as even as possible, but I would say it still fluctuates from .025 - .039" (Volvo design allows for .020" - .059", but that may still mean steady gap - I would expect they would allow for engine component wear, though?) I think I will remove it & file the adjustment slots to allow closer radial adjustment, if it doesn't improve simply by resetting the tooth / CPS positioning.

I do have a nice steady pulse now, checking with a timing light, so I don't know that there is an issue with signal strength at this point?

I have the dist. rotor centered & #1 position - given that the system primarily deals with advance, I can rotate the dist CCW to make sure I have more rotor contact for the advance end. The rotor (1389425) for LH has a very broad contact blade. I don't think this will matter right now in terms of just starting & idling though.

The tricky part is what exactly that means - centered over the edge, just past the edge

I think it would be safe to say that it does not matter at this point. The difference between having the sensor tip just before the edge, right at the edge and right after the edge is probably at most 1 degree. That amount will not matter at all on getting the engine running. It will only affect ignition advance slightly. Not enough to prevent it from starting or running.

Variation of the air gap results in variation of the signal level. VR sensor signal is very dependant of the sensor distance. If the engine does run, then it would seem to be within the acceptable tolerancies though.

I tried fiddling with the trigger wheel relative to TDC - half tooth advanced, half tooth retarded), but can't say it altered anything. Looks like base timing is around 12-14BTDC - hard to tell exactly as the markers are not in a position where you can get a straight view at them. Air gap is good at about .024" - I removed the wheel and cleaned up the slots so I could better center the wheel radially.

Tried a couple different EZK (3531325, 3517402) modules, and a 6842115 and 3515407 LH ECU - didn't change the timing / lean condition. The nice thing about running more base timing is the motor idles at a lower temp - I used to sit at higher coolant temps with the LH2.2 - I couldn't run more than about 6 BTDC with that setup & not get knock at any load.

Wondering if I should swap out the 3517020 MAF for a 760 one. Before I start messing with chipping the ECU's I'd like to see it run reasonably in stock hardware, but maybe that's not possible..

Leave stock maf, the 012 also messes with timing..cant remember how but i think it advances a bit. A less but still possibly dumb idea, have you tried just putting the 30lbs in and seeing what happens? I think its too big a jump for lh2.4 to adapt to but youve already got them...and its a better idea than an 012 on na car

Tried this. Actually runs quite well. I tried jacking the fuel pressure to 70psi with the 18.25Lb'ers, and it wasn't happy at all.

Runs well enough, no audible knock under load ,AFR's are fine at idle & part load, but too rich under heavy accel (12's & richer). O2 sweep at idle is good. I'll see how it is from a cold start. Probably could just drive it as is, but I don't think running that rich (11's) is a good idea under heavier load.

I think running 24lb injectors with the stock MAF will bring the part load & up AFR's into reasonable range. I'll know in a few days.

I had wanted to burn a turbo EZK bin to try, but I'm not sure which bin to use - the 0227-400-208_2227355740_EZK116 ?

Having trouble installing the USB driver for the Williem USB in Windows 8.1 :(

have you disabled o2 feedback in the lh ecu yet? If you're going to be fairly serious about tuning it, you'll want to do that at least while you get things sorted out.

on the ezk bin.. I think the 208 is the one you want to use. You'll want map tracing as well for both ecus to see where it's floating around (but I'm sure you know that already). 11's at heavier load isn't really that bad. 10's is rough, and depending on what 'heavier load' means, 11's could come up, but it's not likely to ruin anything over a short period of time. Is the car NA or turbocharged? (I think I missed that)

edit: NA. yeah, rich, but still not that bad for getting started tuning. I probably wouldn't run it like that forever, but it's not likely to wash things down in 5 minutes either.

__________________
"They bum rushed them in their own crib, they drank all their beer, they partied with their ladies and they left with the trophy"

have you disabled o2 feedback in the lh ecu yet? If you're going to be fairly serious about tuning it, you'll want to do that at least while you get things sorted out.

on the ezk bin.. I think the 208 is the one you want to use. You'll want map tracing as well for both ecus to see where it's floating around (but I'm sure you know that already). 11's at heavier load isn't really that bad. 10's is rough, and depending on what 'heavier load' means, 11's could come up, but it's not likely to ruin anything over a short period of time. Is the car NA or turbocharged? (I think I missed that)

edit: NA. yeah, rich, but still not that bad for getting started tuning. I probably wouldn't run it like that forever, but it's not likely to wash things down in 5 minutes either.

Thanks for the input.

Haven't done any tuning yet - only just figured out how to get the driver installed for my willem programmer - I need to extract the 95x bin from my ECU - I can only find 93x bins online. I have TunerPro RT, as I used it for my M4.4 tuning.

With the 3barFP/30lb/016 MAF the base mix is way too rich - cold start I'm in low 11's - so disabling Lambda will put me right in that range I'm sure. I'm going to get the 24lb in & see what the baseline is. I'll start tuning from that window - which should be well within the adaptive range for starters.